In a case that highlighted the slow handling of land acquisition disputes, the Chhattisgarh High Court at Bilaspur directed the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) of Raigarh to decide a long-pending representation regarding compensation within three months. The petition was filed by members of the Dansena family, who claimed their rightful share in compensation awarded for ancestral land acquired under the Kelo Project.
Background
The land in question, situated in Lakha village of Raigarh district, originally belonged to Shivnandan and his brother Raghunandan. While Raghunandan left no heirs, Shivnandan had three daughters and two sons. According to the petitioners, the land was acquired years ago for the state's Kelo Project, and a compensation amount of nearly ₹75 lakh was sanctioned.
Read also:- Karnataka High Court Directs Lower Court to Decide Injunction Plea Within Four Weeks in Property Dispute
However, the money was deposited in bank accounts linked only to one son, late Palu Ram, leaving out other legal heirs. Petitioners Padmawati @ Mantora Dansena, Nandram Dansena, and Gayawati Dansena approached the court, alleging that despite repeated applications, the revenue authorities failed to apportion the amount among all heirs.
The authorities kept seeking reports from the Patwari but no final order ever came, argued their counsel Rahul Mishra, emphasizing that Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, clearly allows such disputes to be referred to a competent court.
Court's Observations
Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, after hearing both sides, noted the prolonged inaction of the local revenue authorities.
The bench remarked, “The petitioners are not challenging any specific order but the arbitrary inaction of respondent no. 3 in withholding compensation without due apportionment.”
The State’s counsel, Ms. Poorva Tiwari, submitted that the authority was prepared to examine the representation in accordance with law, but the bench insisted on fixing a definite timeline.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea to Quash Cheque Bounce Case, Imposes Costs on Petitioner
Decision
Concluding the matter, the High Court disposed of the writ petition with a clear directive: the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) and Land Acquisition Officer, Raigarh, must decide the pending representation within three months from receiving a copy of the order. The court stressed that the decision must be taken strictly under the applicable rules and statutes.
With this, the petition stood disposed of, bringing some hope of resolution for the Dansena family after years of waiting.
Case Title: Padmawati @ Mantora Dansena & Others vs. The State of Chhattisgarh & Others
Case No.: WPC No. 4678 of 2025
